abseil-cpp

257 Commits

9 Branches

22 Tags

14 MiB

Tag: Branch: Tree: f70eadadd7

Commit Graph

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
Abseil Team	ab21820d47	Export of internal Abseil changes -- e2de21d54c02b6419c57c0f4e2a16b608deca260 by Evan Brown <ezb@google.com>: Remove the InsertEnd benchmark. This benchmark has significantly different possible behaviors that can result in misleading metrics. Specifically, we can have a case where we are deallocating the last node in the b-tree in the erase and then allocating a new node in the insert call repeatedly, whereas normally, we end up just inserting/erasing a value from the last node. Also, the name of the benchmark is misleading because it involves an erase and an insert, but the name only mentions the insert. PiperOrigin-RevId: 360930639 -- 51f6bb97b9cbdb809c31b77e93ce080ca3cba9ea by Benjamin Barenblat <bbaren@google.com>: Stop testing with double-double random variables On POWER, long double is often represented as a pair of doubles added together (double-double arithmetic). We’ve already special-cased double-double arithmetic in a number of tests, but compiler bugs [1, 2, 3] have now triggered both false positives and false negatives, which suggests testing with double doubles is unlikely to yield useful signal. Remove the special casing and detect if we’re on a double-double system; if so, just don’t test long doubles. [1] https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99048 [2] https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=49131 [3] https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=49132 PiperOrigin-RevId: 360793161 -- 07fb4d7932c2f5d711c480f759dacb0be60f975e by Abseil Team <absl-team@google.com>: internal change PiperOrigin-RevId: 360712825 GitOrigin-RevId: e2de21d54c02b6419c57c0f4e2a16b608deca260 Change-Id: I98389b5a8789dcc8f35abc00c767e909181665f0	4 years ago

Author

SHA1

Message

Date

Abseil Team

ab21820d47

Export of internal Abseil changes

--
e2de21d54c02b6419c57c0f4e2a16b608deca260 by Evan Brown <ezb@google.com>:

Remove the InsertEnd benchmark.

This benchmark has significantly different possible behaviors that can result in misleading metrics. Specifically, we can have a case where we are deallocating the last node in the b-tree in the erase and then allocating a new node in the insert call repeatedly, whereas normally, we end up just inserting/erasing a value from the last node. Also, the name of the benchmark is misleading because it involves an erase and an insert, but the name only mentions the insert.

PiperOrigin-RevId: 360930639

--
51f6bb97b9cbdb809c31b77e93ce080ca3cba9ea by Benjamin Barenblat <bbaren@google.com>:

Stop testing with double-double random variables

On POWER, long double is often represented as a pair of doubles added
together (double-double arithmetic). We’ve already special-cased
double-double arithmetic in a number of tests, but compiler
bugs [1, 2, 3] have now triggered both false positives and false
negatives, which suggests testing with double doubles is unlikely to
yield useful signal. Remove the special casing and detect if we’re on a
double-double system; if so, just don’t test long doubles.

[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99048
[2] https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=49131
[3] https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=49132

PiperOrigin-RevId: 360793161

--
07fb4d7932c2f5d711c480f759dacb0be60f975e by Abseil Team <absl-team@google.com>:

internal change

PiperOrigin-RevId: 360712825
GitOrigin-RevId: e2de21d54c02b6419c57c0f4e2a16b608deca260
Change-Id: I98389b5a8789dcc8f35abc00c767e909181665f0

4 years ago

1 Commits (f70eadadd7767c3a97774b63c4c23981fa89af9f)